People frequently overestimate the risk of rare but sensationalized health conditions (like shark attacks or terrorist attacks) while underestimating more common risks like heart disease or car accidents.

“All toads are animals” “All men are animals” Therefore, “All men are toads.” Many would evaluate this as a valid syllogism, due to its ALL ALL ALL form. This is because:

Shafir (1993) found that participants were both more likely to AWARD custody to a parent with lots of positive and negative qualities and DENY custody to that same parent. Participants’ performance on this task violates:

Consider the following premises and conclusion: Premise 1: If the company increases its marketing budget, then sales will improve. Premise 2: Sales improved. Conculsion: The company increased its marketing budget. In this set of statements, what is the conclusion? 

A conclusion in a cateogrical syllogism is logically invalid if: 

If P then Q Not Q Therefore Not P  

Which theory suggests that humans have evolved specific cognitive mechanisms to detect rule-breakers in social exchange situations?

When dual process theories indicate that some reasoners may use a “probabilistic” cause-effect strategy for reasoning problems, what does that mean? 

According to the mental models approach: 

In Mental Models theory, incorrectly rejecting Modus Tollens conclusions typically occurs because: